Several GMs are livid over the restraints on draft spending, according to Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports. Rosenthal also points out that commissioner Bud Selig, Rob Manfred of MLB and union leader Michael Weiner deserve credit for coming to an agreement peacefully.

There won't be hard caps for draft choices under the new CBA, according to Jon Heyman of SI.com (on Twitter). However, there will be recommended bonuses and tax implications for teams that go way over the suggested limits.

If the slotting includes a penalty system for going over slot, then indeed it is a rotten deal. This money in all likelihood would serve no other purpose but go to DOA teams, like Loria’s Marlins, Houston, Oakland and eventually pretty much stop teams, or really slow down many from spending large on top talent players.

Think of it like this.. That risky player drafted in the..10th round with a heavy college commitment that might be swayed into baseball..BUT has a football scholarship to maybe Auburn? Boston takes those kind, we don’t even know if 2 sport are going to be allowed and pro rated down any longer, but I have a feeling that with Selig’s grubby paws on it..More dirt has been thrown into this than we know about yet.

I agree, John. But I’d also suggest that it’s a problem when trying to sign almost all high level talent, regardless of whether they’re potential 2 sport athletes or not. What about the great HS player who tries to use the leverage of going to college instead of the pros? Those types can drive up bonuses as well.

Also, there’s a mention about potentially losing draft picks for over spending. That doesn’t see any better either.

Everyone (well, not everyone really) thinks the large market teams spend more than everyone else, but it is not true. Most here know I am a 1) Red Sox fan and 2) marlins fan. Boston almost always spends 10m +/-, which is usually just in the top half of teams spending on draft picks, but never top 5, but just because they are “big market” fans always pick them out.

Teams like the Pirates are up there now every season, which of course they should be with a top 5 pick, but they are also going “high” on lower picks now as well.

What the rules may start penalizing is just plain old simple biz smarts for teams that have good scouting departments and ones that draft players who are long shots, rather than safe bets.

Questions about the new CBA……
1. Can 2 teams from the same division be the 2 wild cards?
2. Will the season still be 162 games?
3. Is the division series still 5 games?
4. And are type A FA are now type B’s(2013)?

so lets say for example the nats(pulling name outta hat)draft a player in the 1st round and he wants way over the reccomened slot the nats initially say no we cant go over the slot and decide to wait til the deadline to sign picks the deadline passes and player isnt signed

wouldnt the nats be losing a 1st round pick either way as in theyd lose the 1st rnd pick they used to draft this year cause player wouldnt sign and had they signed him theyd lose a future 1st rnd pick for going over slot

I won’t pretend to understand the NBA problems. 99% of the articles I’ve seen are opinion pieces about how those poor and destitute owners are being abused by those greedy no good players…

As for the MLB, 1994 taught everyone a lesson. It nearly killed the game and took a literal infusion of steroids to help save it. Both sides are more afraid of the consequences of not reaching an agreement over everything else.

“How are they suppose to pay child support now? You cant find spinners at affordable prices these days. ”

I’ve yet to see you post a comment that didn’t have an element of childish name calling, outright hate or now blatant racism. I see you enjoy your anonymity, but I’d personally prefer to watch you say things like that in a dark alley full of NBA players. My guess is you wouldn’t have the balls.

From what I’ve read and followed through the negotiation process, its really the owners fault because its not a negotiation. Its basically “give me everything I want, you get nothing or else there is no season”. The players were never going to win the negotiation and they were willing to go from 57% BRI to 50 if they could get some system issues but they couldn’t get that either. Getting threats and ultimatum ultimately decided the NBA players to do what they did. The owners were going to win… they just had to rub it in their faces.

Personally, as a fan I don’t give a crap whose fault it is. Just get it done because nobody is winning. Players don’t get their salaries, owners (big market teams) can’t make money, they will lose fans, people are out of a job. Owners are billionaires and they’re fighting over a few millions, players are living the dream and getting paid in millions and fighting over what would be a few hundred thousands in their salaries annually and my overall thoughts: seriously? Are you freaking kidding me? You’re all rich enough.

Thank god, MLB isn’t going to have this issue and they can also learn from the NHL lockout: nobody wins from this situation.

Yeah, as I said, I really don’t understand it beyond millionaires v. billionaires.

I’m not a big basketball fan. I sort of follow the Celtics and stop caring when they’re eliminated from the playoffs. But I think the thing about all of this that made me raise an eyebrow was the number of articles I kept seeing that while claiming to be unbiased attacked the players as irrationally greedy. Kinda screams to me that someone is stacking the deck in the public opinion department.

Ironically it’s becoming a good think that Selig helped screw the pooch in 1994. Since then there hasn’t been whiff of labor controversy.

I don’t care if some of the owners of smaller market teams are billionaires or not. Are owners of small market teams supposed to lose money on those teams just because they’re billionaires to make everyone else happy? H E L L NO! They didn’t get to be billionaires by being stupid businessmen.

I’m not saying they’re not losing money. I know that, the players know that which is why they’re not asking for an increase in salary. The negotiations pretty much started with players proposal to go down from 57 to 53 to cover those losses. They didn’t think it was enough and pushed for 50-50 which players agreed to if they could get some system issues but the owners wanted the money, system issues, basically everything!

The negotiations have been “I get what I want and you will agree to it”. Players want to play, they were and will lose this big time but the owners are stepping on their throats and making them give up everything and using threats to do so.

They’re fighting over a few system issues that either way would cost the side a few millions on the year and when you’re talking about billions in these negotiation, it just seems silly to fight over a few system issues that could be resolved if owners were willing to compromise a little.